ADVERTISEMENT

Rutgers

lbodel

All-American
Jul 15, 2006
12,088
6,688
113
No talk about the game worries me.....ha.

Going into this game, I think this is a great opportunity for us to get our "defense lives here" mojo back - or at least it better. Rutgers is 13th in the Big Ten in scoring offense, 13th in field goal percentage, and 13th in 3 point field goal percentage.

Purdue needs to show up with some intensity. Obviously Rutgers has shown some signs of life in the Big Ten. They played very well against Maryland for 3/4 of the game until blowing a late lead. They also played Ohio State very tough for a half and played IU tough for pretty much the whole game.

It reminds me of Illinois - although Illinois is a lot better. Purdue showed up lethargic and too late getting going and it got Illinois going and by the second half, they were on a roll. We can't afford to let Rutgers get their confidence going.

As for Purdue, it'd be nice to see a low (in just Purdue terms) turnover game as steals are actually one statistic Rutgers is ok at and Purdue can really assert itself on the boards.
 
No talk about the game worries me.....ha.

Going into this game, I think this is a great opportunity for us to get our "defense lives here" mojo back - or at least it better. Rutgers is 13th in the Big Ten in scoring offense, 13th in field goal percentage, and 13th in 3 point field goal percentage.

Purdue needs to show up with some intensity. Obviously Rutgers has shown some signs of life in the Big Ten. They played very well against Maryland for 3/4 of the game until blowing a late lead. They also played Ohio State very tough for a half and played IU tough for pretty much the whole game.

It reminds me of Illinois - although Illinois is a lot better. Purdue showed up lethargic and too late getting going and it got Illinois going and by the second half, they were on a roll. We can't afford to let Rutgers get their confidence going.

As for Purdue, it'd be nice to see a low (in just Purdue terms) turnover game as steals are actually one statistic Rutgers is ok at and Purdue can really assert itself on the boards.
This board will implode if we lose this game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: punaj
This board will implode if we lose this game.
Never happen! This is one of the games we can all relax our paranoias and just enjoy a road win. Save some mental energy for February - some on the board will need it!
 
Never happen! This is one of the games we can all relax our paranoias and just enjoy a road win. Save some mental energy for February - some on the board will need it!
While I think you say this in jest, I tend to agree. Rutgers is just soooo bad. For anyone who listens to Dakich's show, he was talking about the matchup today. Said something to the effect of "Purdue is favored by 20 points... that's a LOT of points... I don't know what to tell you though, Rutgers is that bad". Went on to say this year's team might be one of the worst he's ever seen in the B1G. I guess anything can happen... but this seems like the closest thing to a sure thing as one can get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mathboy
While I think you say this in jest, I tend to agree. Rutgers is just soooo bad. For anyone who listens to Dakich's show, he was talking about the matchup today. Said something to the effect of "Purdue is favored by 20 points... that's a LOT of points... I don't know what to tell you though, Rutgers is that bad". Went on to say this year's team might be one of the worst he's ever seen in the B1G. I guess anything can happen... but this seems like the closest thing to a sure thing as one can get.

I would bet that they'll beat someone in conference yet this year and everyone will look and wonder how the hell that just happened. Here's hoping that's not us tonight.
 
Shhhh... it wouldn't shock me if it happened.

We lose this and the meltdown on here will be the worst yet.
I don't believe in meltdowns..... But if we lose this one I will be one very disappointed fan! No excuse for this one, this has to be a W. I still think we are in the hunt for conference title, but if we drop this one our chances of that are very, very slim.
 
I will judge if we got mojo back on defense when we play Iowa. This game should be a walk in the park and if its not we got problems.
 
I will judge if we got mojo back on defense when we play Iowa. This game should be a walk in the park and if its not we got problems.

As I said originally, Rutgers played IU close the entire game, they nearly won AT Maryland and played @ Ohio State close for over half the game. While they have been really bad at times, they've shown signs of life in Big Ten play. You have to show up.

Keep in mind this is one of the few games Wisconsin lost last year too.

Not saying it should be close or a loss by any means, but to be disappointed if it's not a blowout - I don't know if I'd go that far. A win is a win, I'll take one any way we can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inspector100
As I said originally, Rutgers played IU close the entire game, they nearly won AT Maryland and played @ Ohio State close for over half the game. While they have been really bad at times, they've shown signs of life in Big Ten play. You have to show up.

Keep in mind this is one of the few games Wisconsin lost last year too.

Not saying it should be close or a loss by any means, but to be disappointed if it's not a blowout - I don't know if I'd go that far. A win is a win, I'll take one any way we can.

Tend to agree here.....one other "nugget" to add to the jinx-meter is that Rutgers is currently on a 20-game conference losing streak.....gonna end sometime......don't think it will be tonight, but you never know for sure.
 
Just got back from the game. I really feel bad for the coach, Eddie Jordan. There is no way Rutgers can compete in the Big Ten. It will be more of the same for many years. On the bright side there were plenty of Boiler fans in the stands tonight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PU pit bull
Just got back from the game. I really feel bad for the coach, Eddie Jordan. There is no way Rutgers can compete in the Big Ten. It will be more of the same for many years. On the bright side there were plenty of Boiler fans in the stands tonight.
Glad you and other Purdue fans made it to the game.Was the attendance under 6000?Boy ,if that's true that is sad .I went to the Purdues womens game vs IU on January 10,and about 8600 were there.
 
Glad you and other Purdue fans made it to the game.Was the attendance under 6000?Boy ,if that's true that is sad .I went to the Purdues womens game vs IU on January 10,and about 8600 were there.

I realize Rutgers has injuries. Over on Hammer and rails. Guy ranks Big 10 every weeks says it's embarrassing for the BIG 10 to have Rutgers in the conference. I tend to agree. You mean the Big 10 couldn't find a better Div 1 school to add? Clearly Rutgers must have been added for their scholastic pedigree. The football team and basketball teams are bottom feeders in the Big 10. Their attendance compared to other Big 10 schools is way below avg. Curious to see long term if Rutgers stays in the conference.
 
I realize Rutgers has injuries. Over on Hammer and rails. Guy ranks Big 10 every weeks says it's embarrassing for the BIG 10 to have Rutgers in the conference. I tend to agree. You mean the Big 10 couldn't find a better Div 1 school to add? Clearly Rutgers must have been added for their scholastic pedigree. The football team and basketball teams are bottom feeders in the Big 10. Their attendance compared to other Big 10 schools is way below avg. Curious to see long term if Rutgers stays in the conference.

Also for extending the conference footprint into/toward the East Coast....Maryland (among other things) provided that as well.
 
Also for extending the conference footprint into/toward the East Coast....Maryland (among other things) provided that as well.

Rutgers has had a lot of issues over the past few years (the general athletic department and multiple sports). Definitely not their finest years. That being said, they do have potential in football. Basketball will take some work. New Jersey, in general, is a pretty talent rich state for sports - Rutgers just typically has not kept it "home"…

Although I will say, I wish the NCAA made the decision to let conferences have a conference championship game with less than 12 teams a long time ago. May have kept the conference merry-go-round more in-check...
 
Just got back from the game. I really feel bad for the coach, Eddie Jordan. There is no way Rutgers can compete in the Big Ten. It will be more of the same for many years. On the bright side there were plenty of Boiler fans in the stands tonight.
It was like watching a Purdue football game.Rutgers talent on the floor tonight compares to the talent that we put out there with pads on. sad!!
 
It was like watching a Purdue football game.Rutgers talent on the floor tonight compares to the talent that we put out there with pads on. sad!!
I was thinking the same exact thing, especially reading the post game comments from the Rutgers side and how they are basically resigned to lose all their conference games.
 
Also, did I hear right on the telecast? I thought they said Rutgers right now from injuries and other circumstances is playing only six scholarship players. Hard to compete on this level with being so short-handed, and tough for the followers of the Scarlet Knights knowing that.

Purdue did what it needed to do, but it's more difficult to learn from this kind of a game IMO.......provided some extended playing time for some, and a chance to get in a good rhythm offensively, though.....CMP probably liked that.
 
I'm not going to argue that Rutgers is the bottom of the B10, that is without question. However, they did lose to IU by only 7 just a couple weeks ago. That isn't a shot at IU or an endorsement for Rutgers, I'm simply saying that on any given night things can happen both good and bad.

With that said, I really wish we would have found someone else to join the conference. Or better yet not expand at all. I really miss the home and home with everybody. I know all the $$$ reasons for expansion with Football, I just really hate the unbalanced schedule in basketball.
 
Also for extending the conference footprint into/toward the East Coast....Maryland (among other things) provided that as well.
Maryland didn't really bring much coverage in the huge NYC-metro market. Not must geographically (mid-Atlantic) but they were also ACC (not Big East), so they weren't shown/followed locally as much in that Big Apple market. Rutgers clearly does bring access to that market and has a huge alumni base there (almost 500K alumni with >2/3 living in NJ/NY. That's the real reason they are in the B1G.
 
I'm not going to argue that Rutgers is the bottom of the B10, that is without question. However, they did lose to IU by only 7 just a couple weeks ago. That isn't a shot at IU or an endorsement for Rutgers, I'm simply saying that on any given night things can happen both good and bad.

With that said, I really wish we would have found someone else to join the conference. Or better yet not expand at all. I really miss the home and home with everybody. I know all the $$$ reasons for expansion with Football, I just really hate the unbalanced schedule in basketball.
I agree with you.When the Big Ten started adding teams like Penn State and getting away from all teams playing twice ,I was afraid I wouldn't like it.Unfortunately,there will always be some teams from now on that have harder conference schedules than others.Like everything in college athletics,its all about the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dryfly88
We quit playing everyone twice long before Rutgers and Maryland joined.
 
We quit playing everyone twice long before Rutgers and Maryland joined.
Agreed, that's why I said "or better yet, not expand at all".

I'm an old guy, I just liked it better when the B10 actually had 10 teams in it!!
 
Maryland didn't really bring much coverage in the huge NYC-metro market. Not must geographically (mid-Atlantic) but they were also ACC (not Big East), so they weren't shown/followed locally as much in that Big Apple market. Rutgers clearly does bring access to that market and has a huge alumni base there (almost 500K alumni with >2/3 living in NJ/NY. That's the real reason they are in the B1G.

I believe it was Cablevision in metro NYC that went in-network with the BTN shortly after RU joined and that single cable provider (not to mention other downstate providers in NJ that signed on afterwards) increased the BTN revenues to cover Rutger's share of the pie plus added to everyone else. In a revenue challenged department like ours, I'll take the additional BB win each year for the check. We may need it next year for a new FB coach.
 
I believe it was Cablevision in metro NYC that went in-network with the BTN shortly after RU joined and that single cable provider (not to mention other downstate providers in NJ that signed on afterwards) increased the BTN revenues to cover Rutger's share of the pie plus added to everyone else. In a revenue challenged department like ours, I'll take the additional BB win each year for the check. We may need it next year for a new FB coach.
My question is what happens if 5 or so years down the road Rutgers continues to struggle and BTN demand in the NYC market dips waaaay below what was originally projected? Would Cablevision consider dropping BTN?
 
My question is what happens if 5 or so years down the road Rutgers continues to struggle and BTN demand in the NYC market dips waaaay below what was originally projected? Would Cablevision consider dropping BTN?
well rutgers isn't the only draw. I lot of us B1G graduates live on the east coast and want to watch btn. btn is a fairly expensive channel so Cablevision could negotiate the price down with btn to carry it, or drop it, but I doubt that would happen based soley on rutgers athletic performances.
 
well rutgers isn't the only draw. I lot of us B1G graduates live on the east coast and want to watch btn. btn is a fairly expensive channel so Cablevision could negotiate the price down with btn to carry it, or drop it, but I doubt that would happen based soley on rutgers athletic performances.
If there was enough demand for BTN without Rutgers then what was the point of adding Rutgers in the first place? I suspect Delaney and others were projecting Rutgers, with added revenues, becoming at least a middle of the pack team and create more of a groundswell for Rutgers as the region's team.
 
If there was enough demand for BTN without Rutgers then what was the point of adding Rutgers in the first place? I suspect Delaney and others were projecting Rutgers, with added revenues, becoming at least a middle of the pack team and create more of a groundswell for Rutgers as the region's team.
I'm sure the conference would prefer rutgers to be more competitive. But psu, maryland, and rutgers covers philly, dc, and jersey. Those are nice markets, even if the team is bad for now. But the btn money is peanuts compared to the conference revenue. Purdue got 32 million from the conference last year. An estimated $1 million of the revenue shares comes from profits made through the Big Ten Network. The Big Ten Network has been generating a profit for a few years now, but some of that money was being used to help Maryland and Rutgers make the transition into the Big Ten. Maryland and Rutgers (and Nebraska) are not eligible for full shares of the Big Ten revenue pie. Nebraska is scheduled to receive its first full revenue share in 2018. Maryland and Rutgers will be eligible for a full share in 2021.
 
RU began the year with six players 6'6" tall or better. Because of injuries, they went into the game against Purdue with one healthy player over 6'4" tall and one limited to no more than 20 minutes per game per the medical staff with four not suited up. Seven total scholarship players suited up against Purdue with one of them, the only post player, limited to 20 minutes per game because of his bad knee and essentially glued to the floor. One of the reasons they were more competitive against Indiana was that they had one more player available and didn't have to play a guard against a six-foot 8 inch 235 pound type player every single minute of the game, but rather only for most of the game. They were never going to be good this year, but they would have improved from last year. It was so bad that when there was a foul out at the end of the game there were no more walkons to put in and the coach had to reinsert a starter. Only one big man is practicing now so he doesn't even have anyone to play against in practice. I have been following college basketball a long time and I have never before seen a team lose not just it's leading scorer and rebounder, but it's entire front line rotation due to injury like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grover
If there was enough demand for BTN without Rutgers then what was the point of adding Rutgers in the first place? I suspect Delaney and others were projecting Rutgers, with added revenues, becoming at least a middle of the pack team and create more of a groundswell for Rutgers as the region's team.

Simple. In-market subscription fees. I believe they can now collect close to 10x more per subscription in the ny/nj market.
 
My question is what happens if 5 or so years down the road Rutgers continues to struggle and BTN demand in the NYC market dips waaaay below what was originally projected? Would Cablevision consider dropping BTN?

I think the better way to look at it is cable overall in the future. ESPNs earnings have been falling as many households drop cable. Their subscriber base has dramatically dropped off and their earnings have also dropped in the billions. This has led to many layoffs there.

Meanwhile, they spend outrageous amounts of money on rights for sports. Many people predict the TV revenue for sports will eventually start going down, if not just stagnating. This could actually be good for the Big Ten Network, as you probably won't see ESPN just drop college football, or Big Ten Football specifically. But they may not televise as many games. So obviously that could leave more games for the Big Ten Network to have, which would make it more solvent (while the number of basketball games is solid, their football selection is typically not great.
 
Simple. In-market subscription fees. I believe they can now collect close to 10x more per subscription in the ny/nj market.
Right. The fees always benefit the network. But if there is no demand (think BTN in Tuscaloosa) then the cable provider will potentially lose customers by having BTN and its fees included in their lineups. People will cancel their cable, switch to a lower cost provider, etc.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT